Between two con-
temporary religious communities working side by side in the same region
and often coming into contact there must have occurred skirmishes; but the
whole doctrine and mode of life adopted by the Buddhists was too widely
different from that of the Jains to give occasion for more than somewhat
temporary relations.
temporary religious communities working side by side in the same region
and often coming into contact there must have occurred skirmishes; but the
whole doctrine and mode of life adopted by the Buddhists was too widely
different from that of the Jains to give occasion for more than somewhat
temporary relations.
Cambridge History of India - v1
, vol.
XXII, p.
271.
>
:
1
3
## p. 138 (#172) ############################################
138
(ch.
THE HISTORY OF THE JAINS
as a householder, and then, leaving all his wealth, became an ascetic. After
84 days of intense meditation he reached the perfect knowledge of a
prophet, and from that time he lived for about 70 years in the state of
most exalted perfection and saintship and reached his final liberation,
nirvāṇa, on the top of mount Sammeta surrounded by his followers.
In regard to the teaching of Pārçva we are better informed : it was
probably essentially the same as that of Mahāvira and his followers,
But
we have no exact knowledge, except on two principal points, as to how far
this creed was due to Pārçva, or what innovations may have been intro-
duced by his successor. We are told that Pārçva enjoined on his followers
four great vow3, viz. not to injure life, to be truthful, not to steal, and to
possess no property,' while Mahāvīra added a fifth requisition, viz. that of
chastity. Further we know that Pārçva allowed his disciples to wear an
upper and an under garment. Mahāvira, on his part, followed the more
rigid rule which obliged the ascetic to be completely naked. These seem
to have been, in fact, the most important differences in doctrine between
the founder and the reformer of Jainism ; for an old canonical textº tells us
about a meeting between Gautama, the pupil of Mahāvira, and Keçin, a
follower of Pārçva, in which they tried successfully to solve those questions
on which a difference of opinion existed among the religious ; and in that
account the four vows and the wearing or not wearing of clothes form the
main points of discussion. From this text we venture to draw the
conclusion that followers of Pārçva, who did not, perhaps, fully recognise
Mahāvīra as their spiritual head, existed during the lifetime of the latter,
and that a sort of compromise was effected between the two sections of the
church. Indeed it seems to remain a somewhat unsettled question if
followers of Pārçva and of Mahāvīra are not to be found even at the pre-
sent day as the Cvetām baras, or 'monks in white clothes', and the
Digambaras, ‘sky-clad or naked ascetics. ' However, this hypothesis is
denied by most authorities; and as a matter of fact the old records place
the divison of the church into these two main sects at a time much later
than Mahāvīra, as we shall see subsequently.
Nothing is known about the followers of Parçva until the time of the
appearance of the last prophet of the Jains, Mahāvīra. As he is not only
the most famous propagator of the Jain religion, but also after Buddha the
best known of the non-Brāhman teachers of ancient India, we shall have to
dwell a little longer upon the records of his life, and in the first place we
must examine such chronological data as exist for the determination of his
period.
1 Cp. S. B. E. , vol. XLV, p. 121, and Dr. Hoernle in Hastings' Encyclopaedia,
vol. I, p. 261.
2 Cp, S. B. E. vol. XLV, pp. 119 sq.
## p. 139 (#173) ############################################
VI]
TRADITIONAL DATE OF MAHAVIRA
139
2
The Jains themselves have preserved chronological records concerning
Mabāvīra and the succeeding pontiffs of the Jain church which may have
been begun at a comparatively early date. But it seems quite clear that,
at the time when these lists were put into their present form, the real date
of Mahāvīra had already either been forgotten or was at least doubtful.
The traditional date of Mahāvīra's death on which the Jains base their
chronological calculations corresponds to the year 470 before the founda-
tion of the Vikrama era in 58 B. C. ; i. e. , 528 B. c. 1 This reckoning is based
mainly on a list of kings and dynasties, who are supposed to have reigned
between 528 and 58 B. C. ; but the list is absolutely valueless, as it confuses
rulers of Ujjain, Magadha, and other kingdoms; and some of these may
perhaps have been contemporary, and not successive as they are represent-
ed. Moreover, if we adopt the year 528 B. C. it would exclude every
possibility of Mahāvīra having preached his doctrine at the same time as
Buddha, as the Buddhist texts assert ; for there is now a general agreement
among scholars that Buddha died within a few years of 480 B. C. ? ; and
therefore some fifty years would have elapsed between the decease of the
two prophets. But we are told that Buddha was 80 years old at his death,
and that he did not begin preaching before his 36th year, that is to say, at a
time when Mahāvīra, according to the traditional date, was already dead.
Finally, both Mahāvīra and Buddha were contemporaries with a king of
Magadha, whom the Jains call Kūņika, and the Buddhists Ajātçatru ; and
he began his reign only eight years before Buddha's death. Therefore, if
Mahāvisa died in 528 B. C. , he could not have lived in the reign of Kūņika.
So we must, no doubt, wholly reject this date and instead of it adopt
another which was long ago suggested by Professor Jacobi' on the authority
of the Jain author Hemachandra (d. 1172 A. D. ), viz. 468 (467) B. C.
The dynastic list of the Jains mentioned above tells that Chandragupta,
the Sandrokottos of the Greeks, began his reign 255 years before the
Vikrama era, or in 313 B. C. , a date that cannot be far wrong. And
Hemachandra states that at this time 155 years had elapsed since the death
of Mahāvīra, which would thus have occurred in 468 B. c. This date agrees
very well with other calculations and is only contradicted by a passage in
the Buddhist Digha Nikaya' which tells us that Nigaộtha Nātaputta-the
>
-
a
1 Or 527 B. C. according to those authorities who regard 57 B. C. as the starting
point of the Vikrama era. Dates are here given on the assumption that Vikrama era
began in 58 B. C.
2 In 483 B. C. according to the system of chronology adopted in this work ; or
in 478 (477) B. C. as appears more probable to the present writer. For a full discussion
the dates of Mahāvīra and Buddha, on the assumption that the Vikrama era began in
57 B. C. , eee Charrentier, Ind. Ant. , 1914, pp. 118 ff, 125 ff; 167 ff.
3 Kalpasutra, pp. 8 ff.
4 V, Inf. , p. 146-47.
5 D. N. , III, pp. 117, 209. Also Majjhima Nikāya, II, pp. 273 ff. Cp. Chalmers,
J. R. A. S. , 1895, pp, 665 f.
2
## p. 140 (#174) ############################################
140
[CH.
THE HISTORY OF THE JAINS
name by which the Buddhists denote Mahāvira-died before Buddha. This
assertion, is however, in contradiction with other contemporaneous state-
ments, and forms no real obstacle to the assumption of the date 468 B. C.
We may therefore adopt this year as our basis for calculating the various
dates in Mahāvira's life.
To give a sketch of Mahāvīra's life is a somewhat difficult task as
the oldest existing biography, included in the chapter of the Kalpasūtra to
which we have referred, is fanciful and exaggerated, bearing in these
respects a certain resemblance to the tales in the Lalita-vistara and Nidāna-
kathā concerning the early life of Buddha. If this biography is really the
work of Bhadrabāhu, it may be expected to contain notices of great value,
even although its statements cannot always be accepted as strictly accurate.
There are, moreover, in several old canonical works passages which give
information on various events in Mahāvīra's life; and the Buddhist
scriptures also give us some valuable hints.
The capital of Videha, Vesāli or Vaicāli', was without doubt one of
the most flourishing towns of India about 500 years before the beginning
of our era. The government, which was republican, or perhaps rather
oligarchical, was entrusted to the princely family of the Licchavis, who are
often mentioned in Buddhist and Jain writings, and who were certainly
mightier at that time than at a later date, when an author remarks that they
lived by assuming the title of king (rājan). ' Just outside Vaicāli lay the
suburb Kundagrāma-probably surviving in the modern village of Basu-
kund-and here lived a wealthy nobleman, Siddhārtha, head of a certain
warrior-clan called the Jñātrikas. This Siddhārtha was married to the
princess Triçalā, sister of Chețaka, the most eminent amongst the Licebavi
princes, and ruler of Vaicāli. To them were born, according to the
tradition, one daughter and two sons, the younger of whom was called
Vardhamāna, the future Mahā vīra. Through the Licchavis Siddhārtha
became the relative of a very powerful monarch ; for king Bimbisāra or
Creņika of Magadha, the patron of Buddha and the mightiest ruler of
Eastern India, had married Chellanā, daughter of Chetaka , and she was
mother of Ajātaçatru or Kuņika, who murdered his father eight years
before the death of Buddha, and ascended the blood-stained throne of
Magadha.
This is what we learn from the Kalpasūtra concerning Mahāvīra's
pedigree ; and there is no reason to doubt this information. But the birth
of great men- and especially religious teachers- has often afterwards been
made a theme for the most fanciful and supernatural legends. And so the
Kalpasūtra tells us that Mahāvīra, when he descended from the heavenly
1 The site and surroundings of Vaicāli are indicated by Vincent A. Smith,
J. R. A. S. 1902, pp. 267 ff.
2 The Arthaçāstra of Kautilya, p. 376.
I
>
1
1
## p. 141 (#175) ############################################
VI ).
MAHĀVĪRA
141
)
palace of Pushpottara where he had led his previous existence, was at first
conceived in the womb of Devānandā, wife of the Brāhman Rishabhadatta.
This couple, too, lived in the suburb of Kundagrāma. However, it had
never happened in the innumerable cycles of previous world-periods that a
prophet had been born in a Brāhman family ; and consequently the god
Çakra (Indra) had the embryo removed from the womb of Devānandā to
that of Triçalā. We must observe, however, that this tale is only believed
by the Çvetāmbaras, and constitutes one of the four main points rejected
by the Digambaras, who seem here to hold the more sensible opinion.
Just like the mother of Buddha, the princess Triçalā had auspicious
dreams in the very night of conception ; and the interpreters foretold that
the child would become either a universal monarch or a prophet possessing
all-comprising knowledge. So the boy, whose birth was celebrated alike
by gods and men, was received by his parents with the most lofty expecta-
tions, and was educated to the highest perfection in all branches of
knowledge and art. In due time he was married to a lady, named Yaçodā,
and had by her a daughter, who became the wife of Jamāli, a future disciple
of his father-in-law, and the propagator of the first schism in the Jain
church. However, Mahāvīra's mind was not turned towards secular
things ; and in his thirtieth year, after the decease of his parents, he left
his home with the permission of his elder brother, Nandivardhana, and set
out for the life of a homeless monk.
The first book of the Jain canon, the Āchārānga-sūtra, has preserved
a sort of religious ballad1 giving an account of the years during which
Mahāvīra led a life of the hardest asceticism, thus preparing himself for the
attainment of the highest spiritual knowledge, that of a prophet. During
the first thirteen months he never changed his robe, but let 'all sorts of
living beings' – as the text euphemistically says-crawl about on his body,
but after this time he laid aside every kind of garment and went about as
a naked ascetic. By uninterrupted meditation, unbroken chastity, and the
most scrupulous observations of the rules concerning eating and drinking,
he fully subdued his senses ; nor did he ever in the slightest degree hurt or
cause offence to any living being. Roaming about in countries inhabited
by savage tribes, rarely having a shelter in which to rest for the night, he
had to endure the most painful and injurious treatment from the barbarous
inhabitants. However, he never lost his patience, and never indulged in
feelings of hatred or revenge against his persecutors. His wanderings seem
to have covered a wide area and on occasions ho visited Rajagriha, the
capital of Magadha, and other towns where the utmost honour was shown
him by pious householders.
It was during one of these visits to Nālandā, a suburb of Bājagriha
famous in the sacred history of the Buddhists, that he met with Gosāla
Translated in S. B E. , vol. XXII, pp. 79 ff.
>
1
## p. 142 (#176) ############################################
142
. (CH.
THE HISTORY OF THE JAINS
Mamkhaliputta, a mendicant friar, who attached himself to Mahāvīra for
some years. The consequences of this meeting were certainly disastrous for
both the teacher and the disciple. For six years they lived together practis-
ing the most austere asceticism ; but after that time, on account of a dispute
which arose out of a mere trifle, Gosāla separated himself from Mahāvīra,
and set up a religious system of his own, soon afterwards proclaiming that
he had attained to the highest stage of saintship, that of a tirthakara. This
claim was put forth two years before Mahāvīra himself had reached his
perfect enlightenment. The doctrines and views of Gosāla are known to us
only from notices scattered throughout the Jain and Buddhist writings and
his followers, the Ājīvika sect, have left no written documents ; but from
the intolerant and bitter sayings of the Jains concerning Gosāla whom they
stigmatise as merely a treacherous imposter, we may well conclude that the
cause of dissension between him and his former teacher was deep-rooted,
and that this quarrel must have been a severe blow to the rising influence
of Mahăvira and the establishment of the new religious community.
Gozāla took up his head-quarters in a potter's shop belonging to a woman
named Hālāhalā at Çrāvastī, and seems to have gained considerable repu-
tation in that town. We shall hear something about him at a later stage;
but for the present we must return to Mahāvīra himself.
Twelve years spent in self-penance and meditation were not fruitless;
for in the thirteenth year Mahāvira at last reached supreme knowledge and
final deliverance from the bonds of pleasure and pain. The ipsissimi verba
of an old text will perhaps best show us how the Jains themselves have
described this the most important moment of the prophet's life: during the
thirteenth year, in the second month of summer, in the fourth fortnight, the
light (fortnight) of Vaicākha, on its tenth day, called Suvrata, while the
moon was in conjunction with the asterism Uttara-Phalguni, when the
shadow had turned towards the east, and the first wake was over, outside
of the town Jřimbhikagrāma, on the northern bank of the river Rijupālikā,
in the field of the householder Sāmāga, in a north-eastern direction from
an old temple, not far from a Sāl tree, in a squatting position with joined
heels exposing himself to the heat of the sun, with the knees high and the
head low, in deep meditation, in the midst of abstract meditation, he
reached nirvana, the complete and full, the unobstructed, unimpeded, in-
finite and supreme, best knowledge and intuition, called kevala (total).
When the venerable one had become an Arhat and Jina, he was a kevalin,
omniscient and comprehending all objects, he knew all conditions of the
world, of gods, men, and demons; whence they come, where they go,
whether they are born as men or animals, or become gods or hell-beings;
their food, drink, doings, desires, and the thoughts of their minds ; he saw
## p. 143 (#177) ############################################
VI
MAHĀVIRA
143
1
and knew all conditions in the whole world of all living beings. ?
At this time Vardhamāna, henceforth styled Mahāvira (the great hero)
or Jina (the conqueror), was 42 years old ; and from this age he entered
upon a new stage of life, that of a religious teacher and the head of a sect
called the nirgranthas 'free from fetters,' a designation nowadays obsolete,
and superseded by the term Jainas 'followers of the Jina. '
His parents
had, according to a tradition which seems trustworthy, been followers of
Pārçva, the previous tirhankara : as has already been pointed out, the
doctrine of Mahāvīra was scarcely anything else than a modified or reno-
vated form of Pārçva's creed. As he was a nirgrantha monk, and a scion
of the Jnātại clan, his opponents, the Buddhists, call him Nigganha
Nāt (h)aputta (in Sanskrit Nigrantho Jñātriputra? ). We owe to Professor
Jacobi the suggestion, which is undoubtedly correct, that the teacher, who
is thus styled in the sacred books of the Buddhists, is identical with
Mahāvīra, and that consequently he was a contemporary of Buddha.
We possess little knowledge of the thirty years, during which Mahāvira
wandered about preaching his doctrine and making converts. He appa-
rently visited all the great towns of N. and S. Bihar, principally dwelling
in the kingdoms of Magadha and Anga. The Kalpasūtra tells us that he
spent his rainy seasons, during which the rules for monks prohibited the
wandering life, at various places, e. g. at Champā the capital of Anga, at
Mithilā in the kingdom of Videha, and at Çrāvastī, but chiefly, at his native
town Vaicāli and at Rājagriha, the old capital of Magadha. He frequently
met with Bimbisāra and his son, Ajātaçatru or Kūņika, the kings of
Magadha, and their near relations; and according to the texts he was
always treated by them and other important persons with the utmost res-
pect, and made many converts amongst the members of the highest society.
But we must observe that the Buddhists in an equal degree claim these kings
as followers of their prophet; and we may conclude that uniform courtesy
towards teachers of different sects was as common a characteristic of Indian
kings in those days as at a later period. The Jains do not tell us anything
about the Buddhists; but the latter frequently mention discussions and
controversies between Buddha and disciples of Mahāvīra. In these accounts
Buddha, of course, always has the last word, and is said to have inflicted
considerable loss on the Jain community through the converts which he
made amongst its followers. Even king Ajātaçatru, according to the Pāli
texts, failed to obtain a satisfactory explanation concerning matters of
religion from Mahāvira, and consequently turned to Buddha with a far
better result ; but there seems to be little doubt that the Jains have more
claim to include the patricide king amongst their converts than the Buddhi-
sts. Another prominent lay. follower of Mahāvīra was the householder of
1 From the Āchärānga-sütra, vol. I, pp. 15, 25-26 (translated in S. B. E. , vol. XXII
pp. 201 sq).
## p. 144 (#178) ############################################
144
[ ch.
THE HISTORY OF THE JAINS
.
I
!
Rajagriha; Upāli, who in his enthusiasm embarked on the attempt to con-
vince Buddha of his wrong views. We learn, however, that the great
,
teacher easily upset his arguments, and gained in his opponent a stalwart
adherent to his creed. Subsequently, Upāli is said to have treated his
former teacher with an arrogance, which so shocked Mahāvira that 'hot
blood gushed from his mouth. "
But although the relations between the Jains and Buddhists were by
no means friendly, we must probably not attach too much importance to
the controversies between them or to the number of converts said to have
been gained by one sect at the expense of the other.
Between two con-
temporary religious communities working side by side in the same region
and often coming into contact there must have occurred skirmishes; but the
whole doctrine and mode of life adopted by the Buddhists was too widely
different from that of the Jains to give occasion for more than somewhat
temporary relations. We cannot here enter upon any full investigation of
the doctrine of Mahāvira. It must suffice here to point out that it repre-
sents, probably, in its fundamental tenets one of the oldest modes of thought
known to us, the idea that all nature, even that which seems to be most
inanimate, possesses life and the capability of reanimation ; and this
doctrine the Jains have, with inflexible conservatism, kept until modern
times. This has nothing in common with the philosophy of Buddha. There
is, in reality, no resemblance between the two systems except in regard to
such matters as are the commonplaces of all Hindu philosophy. Even for
those superficial believers who looked more to the exterior appearance and
mode of life than to the doctrine and faith, the two sects presented an
aspect so completely different that one could not easily be confused with
the other. Buddha had at first sought freedom from karman, or the bond-
age of 'works', and from transmigration in exaggerated self-torture : but
he soon found that this was not the way to peace ; and consequently he
did not enforce upon his followers the practice of too hard self-penance but
advised them to follow a middle way, that is to say, a simple life but one
free from self-torture. Mahāvīra also had practised asceticism but with a
different result ; for he had found in its severest forms the road to deliver-
ance, and did not hesitate to commend nakedness, self-torture, and death by
starvation as the surest means of reaching final annihilation; and the Jains
proud of their own austerities often stigmatise the Buddhists as given to
greed and luxury. 'Buddha always warned his disciples against hunting or
causing pain to any living being ; but Mahavira fell into exaggerations even
here, and he seems in reality often to care much more for the security of
animals and plants than for that of human beings. Such instances of a
deep-rooted divergence in views could easily be multiplied ; but what has
been already pointed out is sufficient to prove that the Jains and Buddhists
1 Cf, tle Upali • sutra Majjhima Nikaya, vol. I, pp. 371 ff.
1
.
## p. 145 (#179) ############################################
VI]
SCHISMS IN THE JAIN CHURCH
145
were in fact too far asunder to be a ble to inflict any very serious damage
on each other. But this does not mean, however, that rivalry and hatred
did not exist between them : such feelings certainly did exist, and we need
not doubt that these rivals did their best to annoy each other according
to abilities and opportunities.
A far more dangerous rival of Mahāvīra was Gosāla. Not only was
his doctrine, although differing on many points, mainly taken from the
tenets of Mahāviral ; but his whole mode of life also, in its insistence on
nakedness and on the utter deprivation of all comforts, bore a close resemb-
lance to that of the Jains. Between two sects so nearly related the
transition must have been easy ; and pious people may not always have
been quite sure whether they were honouring the adherents of one sect or
of the other. The Jain scriptures admit that Gosāla had a great many
followers in Çrāvasti ; and, if we may trust their hints as to his laxity in
moral matters, it is possible that his doctrine may for some people have
possessed other attractions than those of asceticism and holiness. Although
Mahāvīra is said not to have had any personal meeting with Gosāla until
shortly before the death of the latter, it seems clear that they carried on a
bitter war against each other through their followers. Finally, in the
sixteenth year of his career as a prophet, Mahāvira visited Çravasti, the
headquarters of his mortal enemy. The account given by the Jains tells us
that, at this meeting, Mahāvira inflicted a final blow on his adversary, and
that Gosāla died a week afterwards, having passed his last days in a state of
drunkenness and mental imbecility, but showing some signs of repentance
at the last. But the story is rather confused, and it seems doubtful to what
extent we may trust it. However, it may be regarded as beyond dispute
that Mahāvira was considerably relieved by the death of his opponent; and,
according to the Bhagavati-sūtra, he took a rather strange revenge on the
dead man by describing to his disciples all the wicked deeds he would have
to perform, and all the pains he would have to suffer in future existences,
thus to a certain degree anticipating Dante's treatment of his adversaries.
The death of Gosāla occurred shortly after Ajātaçatru had gained accession
to the throne of Magadha by the murder of his father.
Even within the Jain church there occurred certain schismatical
difficulties at this time. In the fourteenth year of Mahāvira's office as
prophet, his nephew and son-in-law, Jamāli, headed an opposition against
him and similarly, two years afterwards, a holy man in the community,
named Tisagutta, made an attack on a certain point in Mahāvira's doctrine.
But both of these schisms merely concerned trifles, and seem to have
caused no great trouble, as they were speedily stopped by the authority of
the prophet himself. Jamāli, however, persisted in his heretical opinions
ūntil his death.
1 Cp. Hastings' Encyclopaedia, vol. I, p. 261, for further details.
a
## p. 146 (#180) ############################################
146
( ch.
THE HISTORY OF THE JAINS
Mahāvira survived his hated rival Gosila for sixteen years, and
probably witnessed the rapid progress of his faith during the reign of
Ajātaçatru, who seems to have been a supporter of the Jains, if we may
infer that gratitude is the motive which leads them to make excuses for
the horrible murder of his father, Bimbisāra. However, we are not in-
formed of any special events happening during the last period of his life,
which may have been as monotonous as that of most religious mendicants.
He died, after having reached an age of 72 years, in the house of king
Hastipāla's scribe in the little town of Pāwā near Rājagriha, a place still
visited by thousands of Jain pilgrims. This event may have occurred at
the end of the rainy season in the year 468 B. c. Thus, he had survived both
of his principal adversaries ; for Buddha's decease most probably took
place at least ten, if not fifteen, years earlier,
Out of the eleven gañadharas 'heads of the school,' or apostles, of
Mahāvira only one survived him, viz. Sudharman, who became the first
pontiff of the new church after his master. Absolutely nothing is known
concerning the fate of the community for more than 150 years after the
death of its founder beyond the very scanty conclusions which may be drawn
from the legendary tales related by later Jain writers, above all the great
Hemachandra. According to these authorities, Ajātaçatru was succeeded by
his son Udāyin, a prince, who may have reigned for a considerable time, and
who was a firm upholder of the Jain religion. But the irony of fate was
visible even here ; for the very favour which he had bestowed upon the Jains
proved to be the cause of his ruin :-a prince whose father he had dethroned
plotted against his life ; and, aware of the welcome accorded to the Jains by
Udāyin, he entered his palace in the disguise of a Jain monk, and murdered
him in the night. This happened 60 years after Mahāvira's decease. The
dynasty of the nine Nandas, somewhat ill-famed in other records which call
its founder the son of a courtezan and a barber? , then came to the throne of
Magadha. However, the Jains do not share the bad opinion of these kings
which was held by the Buddhists. This fact seems to suggest that the Nanda
kings were not unfavourably inclined towards the Jain religion ; and this
inference gains some support from another source, for the badly mutilated
inscription of Khāravela, king of Kalinga and a faithful Jain, mentions,
apparently, in one passage 'king Nanda' in unmistakable connexion with
‘an idol of the first Jina? . ' But the reign of the Nandas is one of the darkest
event of the many hopelessly dark epochs in the history of ancient India.
The last of the Nandas was dethroned by Chandragupta, the founder
of the Maurya dynasty, with the aid of the great statesman, Chāṇakya,
1 For reasons why the Buddhist account, according to which Mahāvira died
before Buddha, is not accepted here, see Charpentier, Ind. Ant. , 1914, p. 177.
2 See however Chapter XIII.
3 Cf. Ind Ant. , Ind. , 1914, p. 173.
## p. 147 (#181) ############################################
3
VI ]
ÇVETĀ MBARAS AND DIGAMBARAS
147
within a few years of the departure of Alexander the Great from India. The
Jains put the date of Chandragupta's accession in 313 (312) B. C. , that is to
say, eight years later than the Buddhists. This date coincides probably with
a year which marks an epoch in the history of the Jain church. Sudharman,
the first pontiff, had died twenty years after his master leaving the mitre to
Jambu, who held his high office for 44 years, dying at a time nearly
coincident with the accession of the Nandas. After him passed three
generations of pontiffs ; and, in the time of the last Nanda, the Jain church
was governed by two high-priests, Sambhūtavijaya and Bhadrabāhu, the
author of the biography of Mahāvīra quoted above. These two were the
last who knew perfectly the fourteen pūrvas or divisions of the most ancient
Jain scriptures ; and Sambhūtavijaya is said to have died in the same year
in which Chandragupta took possession of the throne. At the same time a
dreadful famine lasting for twelve years devastated the region of Bengal ;
and Bhadrabāhu, seeing that this evil time would provoke numerous
offences against the ecclesiastical rules, thought it prudent to escape.
Gathering his followers together, therefore, he emigrated, and took up his
abode in the country of Karņāța in Southern India. The whole
community, however, did not follow him. Many Jains remained in
Magadha and other places under the spiritual leadership of Sthūlabhadra,
a disciple of Sambhūtavijaya.
At the end of the famine the emigrants returned, but at this time
Bhadrabāhu seems to bave laid down his leadership of the church, and to
have retired to Nepal in order to pass the remainder of his life in penance
leaving the succession to Sthūlabhadra. There is no reason to believe the
account given by the Digambaras, according to which he was murdered by
his own disciples. But, in any case, this time seems to have been one of
misfortune for the Jain church; and there can be no doubt is was then, i. e.
;
about 300 B. C. , that the great schism originated, which has ever since
divided the community in two great sects, the Cvetāmbaras and the
Digambaras. The returning monks, who had during the famine strictly
observed the rules in all their severity, were discontented with the conduct
of the brethren who had remained in Magadha, and stigmatised them as
heretics of wrong faith and lax discipline. Moreover, during this time of
dissolution, the old canon had fallen into oblivion ; and consequently the
monks who had remained in Magadha convoked a great council at
Pāțaliputra, the modern Patna, in order to collect and revise the scriptures.
However, this proved to be an undertaking of extraordinary difficulty,
since the pūrvas or older parts were known perfectly only to Bhadrabāhu,
who had at this time already settled in Nepāl; and Sthūlabhadra, who went
there in person, although he learnt from his predecessor all the fourteen
púrras, was forbidden to teach more than the first ten of them to others.
## p. 148 (#182) ############################################
148
[ch.
THE HISTORY OF THE JAINS
The canon established by the Council was therefore a fragmentary one;
and in it, to some extent, new scriptures, took the place of the old. In some
degree it may be represented by the present canon of the Cvetāmbaras,
since that too is preserved in a somewhat disorderly condition. The
returning monks, the spiritual ancestors of the Digambaras, seem to have
taken no part in the council, and to have proclaimed that the real canon
had been hopelessly lost ; and even to the present day they have continued
to hold the same opinion. They regard the whole canon of the
Çvetāmbaras, the Siddhānta as it is called, as merely a late and unauthori-
tative collection of works, brought together by Jina chandra in Valabhi at
a far later date.
But probably the difficulties which beset the Jain church at this period
were not only internal. As is well known, the Jains nowadays are settled
principally in Western India, Gujarāt, etc. That they have been there for a
very long time is certain, since their non-canonical writings, as well as
epigraphical documents, bear witness at an early date to their influence in
these parts of India. As the historical records of the sect have very little
to tell us of the reign of Chandragupta and his son Bindusāra, and perhaps
even still less of the great Açoka, it seems probable that they had already
in the third century B. c. begun to lose their foothold in Eastern India. The
manual of politics by Chāņakya describes a purely Brāhman society ; and
it may perhaps not be too hazardous to infer from this fact that the first
rise of the Maurya dynasty may have marked an attempt to restore the
Brāhman power and so check the rising influence of the heterodox
communities. If so, this policy was certainly abandoned by Açoka whose
zeal for Buddhism may have been one of the main causes for the downfall
of his great empire immediately after his death. It is true that Açoka in
one of his edicts mentions his protection of the nirgranthas as well as of
the Buddhists and other pious men ; but any attempt to prove a greater
interest on his part in the welfare of the Jains must fail, unsupported as it
is by the scriptures of the Jains themselves. It is true too that Khāravela,
king of Kalinga, who, although his exact date may be doubted, certainly,
lived a considerable time after Açoka, displayed a great zeal for the Jain
religion : but it seems quite clear that, at the time of Açoka's death, the
Jains had practically lost their connexion with Eastern India ; since they
apparently know nothing of his grandson Daçaratha, who succeeded him in
Magadha, and, of the following princes, only the usurper Pushyamitra, a
patron of Brāhmanism, is mentioned by them. On the other hand, they
tell us that Samprati, another grandson of Açoka who reigned probably in
Ujjain, was a strong supporter of their religion, and his capital seems to
have played at this time an important role in the history of Jainism.
As we have seen, in about 300 B. C the division of the Jain church
## p. 149 (#183) ############################################
VI]
WESTERN SETTLEMENTS
149
into the two great sects of the Çvetāmbaras and Digambaras had probably
already begun. The final separation between the two communities is, no
doubt, reported not to have taken place before 79 or 82 A. D. ; but the list
of teachers and schools in the Kalpasūtra and the numerous inscriptions
from Mathurā, which date mostly from the time of the later Kushāņa kings,
i. e. , after 78 A. D. , afford sufficient proof that the Çvetāmbara community
was not only established but had become subdivided into smaller sects at
an earlier period. This is especially clear from the frequent mention of
nuns in the Mathurā inscriptions for it is only the Cvetāmbaras who give
women admission into the order. Everything tends to show that the Jains
were probably already at this time (300 B. C. ) gradually losing their position
in the kingdom of Magadha, and that they had begun their migration
towards the Western part of India, where they settled, and where they have
retained their settlements to the present day. Attention has already been
called to the fact that the later Jain authors mention Ujjain as a place
where their religion had already gained a strong foothold in the age of
Açoka and his immediate successors. Another locality in which the Jains
seem to have been firmly established, from the middle of the second
century B. c. onwards, was Mathurā, in the old kingdom of the Çūrasenas,
known at an earlier date, e. g. by Megasthenes (300 B. c. ), as the centre of
Krishna-worship. The numerous inscriptions, excavated in this city by
General Cunningham and Dr. Führer, and deciphered by Professor Bühler,
tell us about a wide-spread and firmly established Jain community, strongly
supported by pious lay devotees, and very zealous in the consecration and
worship of images and shrines dedicated to Mahāvira and his predecessors.
An inscription, probably dated from 157 A. D. (=79 Çaka), mentions the
Vodva tope as 'built by the gods,' which, as Bühler rightly remarks, proves
that it in the second century A. D. must have been of considerable age as
everything concerning its origin had been already forgotten.
Except the long lists of teachers, often more or less apocryphal, which
have been preserved by the modern subdivisions of the Jain community,
there exist practically no historical records concerning the Jain church in
the centuries immediately preceding our era. Only one legend, the
Kāla kācharya-kathānaka, 'the story of the teacher Kālaka,' tells us about
some events which are supposed to have taken place in Ujjain and other
parts of Western India during the first part of the first century B. c. , or
immediately before the foundation of the Vikrama era in 58 B. c. This
legend is perhaps not totally devoid of all historical interest. For it records
how the Jain saint Kālaka, having been insulted by king Gardabhilla of
Ujjain, who, according to various traditions, was the father of the famous
Vikramāditya, went in his desire for revenge to the land of the Çakas,
whose king was styled 'King of Kings' (sāhānusāhi). This title, in its
.
## p. 150 (#184) ############################################
150
[CH
THE HISTORY OF THE JAINS
a
Greek and Indian forms, was certainly borne by the Çaka kings of the
Punjab, Maues and his successors, who belong to this period ; and, as it
actually appears in the form shaonano shao on the coins of their successors,
the Kushāņa monarchs, we are perhaps justified in concluding that the
legend is to some extent historical in character. However this may be, the
story goes on to tell us that Kālaka persuaded a number of Çaka satraps to
invade Ujjain and overthrow the dynasty of Gardabhilla ; but that, some
years afterwards, his son, the glorious Vikramāditya, repelled the invaders
and re-established the throne of his ancestors. What the historical
foundation of this legend may be, is wholly uncertain -perhaps it contains
faint recollections of the Scythian dominion in Western India during the
first century B. C. In any case, it seems undoubtedly to give further proof
of connexion of the Jains with Ujjain, a fact indicated also by their use
of the Vikrama era, which was established in the country of Mālwā, of
which Ujjain was the capital.
Thus, the history of the Jains during these centuries is enveloped in
almost total darkness; nor bave we any further information as to the
internal conditions of the community. Almost the only light thrown upon
these comes from the Mathurā inscriptions, which incidentally mention a
number of various branches, schools, and families of the Jain community.
From this source, too, we learn the names of teachers who under different
titles acted as spiritual leaders of these subdivisions, and of monks and
nuns who practised their austere life under their leadership. Much the
same religious conditions as are shown by the inscriptions have been pre-
served in the Jain church till the present day, although the names and
external forms of the sects and the monastic schools may have changed in
the course of twenty centuries. Moreover, the inscriptions mention the
names of a vast number of these pious lay people, both male and female,
who, in all ages, by providing the monks and nuns with their scanty liveli-
hood, have proved one of the firmest means of support for the Jain church
and whose zeal for their religion is attested by the numerous gifts of objects
for worship recorded in the inscriptions. Dr. Hoernle' is no doubt right in
maintaining that this good organisation of the Jain lay community must
have been a factor of the greatest importance to the church during the whole
of its existen ce, and may have been one of the main reasons why the Jain
religion continued to keep its position in India, whilst its far more im.
portant rival, Buddhism, was entirely swept away by the Brāhman reaction.
The inflexible conservatism of the small Jain community in holding fast to
its original in stitutions and doctrine has probably been the chief cause of
its survival during periods of severe affliction ; for, as Professor Jacobi has
pointed out long ago, there can be little doubt, that the most important
1 Proceed. of the A8. Soc. of Bengal, 1898, p. 53.
2 2. D. M. G. , XXXVIII, pp. 17 sq.
>
## p. 151 (#185) ############################################
VI ]
CONSERVATISM OF THE JAINS
151
doctrines of the Jain religion have remained practically unaltered since the
first great separation in the time of Bhadrabāhu about 300 B. C. And,
although a number of the less vital rules concerning the life and practices
of monks and laymen, which we find recorded in the holy scriptures, may
have fallen into oblivion or disuse, there is no reason to doubt that the
religious life of the Jain community is now substantially the same as it was
two thousand years ago.
It must be confessed from this that an absolute
refusal to admit changes has been the strongest safeguard of the Jains. To
what extent the well-known quotation ‘sint ut sunt aut non sint may be
applicable to the Jains of our days, may be questioned ; but the singularly
primitive idea that even lifeless matter is animated by a soul, and the
austerest perhaps of all known codes of disciplinary rules seem scarcely
congruent with modern innovations.
In the preceding pages an attempt has been made to give a brief
sketch of the history of the Jain church from its foundation or reformation
by Mahāvira about 500 B. c. down to the beginning of our era.
While we
possess materials which enable us to construct a fairly clear biography of
the prophet, and while we have at least some information concerning the
events which preceded and were contemporary with the beginning of the
great separation between Cvetāmbaras and Digambaras about 300 B. C. , the
following period is almost totally devoid of any historical record. And this
is not the only blank in Jain ecclesiastical history. Scarcely more is known
concerning the fate of the Jain church during the early centuries of our era
down to the time of the great council of Valabhi, in the fifth or at the
beginning of the sixth century A. D. , when the canon was written down in
its present form. The Jain church has never had a very great number of
adherents ; it has never attempted-at least not on any grand scale - to
preach its doctrines through missionaries outside India. Never rising to
an overpowering height but at the same time never sharing the fate of its
rival, Buddhism, that of complete extinction in its native land, it has led
a quiet existence through the centuries and has kept its place amongst the
religious system of India till the present day, thanks to its excellent
organisation and to its scrupulous care for the preservation of ancient
customs, institutions, and doctrine.
## p. 152 (#186) ############################################
CHAPTER VII
THE EARLY HISTORY OF THE BUDDHISTS
1. PRE-BUDDHISTIC
The early history of the Buddhists should properly begin far enough
back before the birth of the Buddha to throw light on the causes that were
at work in producing the rise and progress of the Buddhist reformer.
Unfortunately, even after all that has been written on the subject of early
Buddhist chronology, we are still uncertain as to the exact date of the
Buddha's birth. The date 483 B. C. which is adopted in this History must
still be regarded as provisional. The causes of this uncertainty which were
explained by the present writer in 1877 still remain the same :
If the date for Asoka is placed too early in the Ceylon chronicles, can
we still
trust the 218 years which they allege to have elapsed from the coinmencement of the
Buddhist era down to the time of Asoka ? If so we have only to add that number to
the correct date of Asoka, and thus fix the Buddhist era (the date of the Buddha's
death) at 483 B. C. or shortly after. Of the answer to this question, there can, I think,
be no doubt. We can not? .
This statement was followed by an analysis of the details of the lists
of kings and teachers, the length of whose reigns or lives, added together,
amount to this period of 218 years. The analysis shows how little the list
can be relied on. The fact is that all such calculations are of very
doubtful
validity when they have to be made backwards for any lengthened period.
Sinologists, Assyriologists, Egyptologists have not been able to agree on
results sought by this method ; and, though Archbishop Usher's attempt
to discover in this way, from the Hebrew records, the correct date of the
creation was long accepted, it is now mere matter for derision, As is well
known, even the Christian chronologists, though the interval they had to
cover was very short, were wrong in their calculation of our Christian era.
>
:
1
3
## p. 138 (#172) ############################################
138
(ch.
THE HISTORY OF THE JAINS
as a householder, and then, leaving all his wealth, became an ascetic. After
84 days of intense meditation he reached the perfect knowledge of a
prophet, and from that time he lived for about 70 years in the state of
most exalted perfection and saintship and reached his final liberation,
nirvāṇa, on the top of mount Sammeta surrounded by his followers.
In regard to the teaching of Pārçva we are better informed : it was
probably essentially the same as that of Mahāvira and his followers,
But
we have no exact knowledge, except on two principal points, as to how far
this creed was due to Pārçva, or what innovations may have been intro-
duced by his successor. We are told that Pārçva enjoined on his followers
four great vow3, viz. not to injure life, to be truthful, not to steal, and to
possess no property,' while Mahāvīra added a fifth requisition, viz. that of
chastity. Further we know that Pārçva allowed his disciples to wear an
upper and an under garment. Mahāvira, on his part, followed the more
rigid rule which obliged the ascetic to be completely naked. These seem
to have been, in fact, the most important differences in doctrine between
the founder and the reformer of Jainism ; for an old canonical textº tells us
about a meeting between Gautama, the pupil of Mahāvira, and Keçin, a
follower of Pārçva, in which they tried successfully to solve those questions
on which a difference of opinion existed among the religious ; and in that
account the four vows and the wearing or not wearing of clothes form the
main points of discussion. From this text we venture to draw the
conclusion that followers of Pārçva, who did not, perhaps, fully recognise
Mahāvīra as their spiritual head, existed during the lifetime of the latter,
and that a sort of compromise was effected between the two sections of the
church. Indeed it seems to remain a somewhat unsettled question if
followers of Pārçva and of Mahāvīra are not to be found even at the pre-
sent day as the Cvetām baras, or 'monks in white clothes', and the
Digambaras, ‘sky-clad or naked ascetics. ' However, this hypothesis is
denied by most authorities; and as a matter of fact the old records place
the divison of the church into these two main sects at a time much later
than Mahāvīra, as we shall see subsequently.
Nothing is known about the followers of Parçva until the time of the
appearance of the last prophet of the Jains, Mahāvīra. As he is not only
the most famous propagator of the Jain religion, but also after Buddha the
best known of the non-Brāhman teachers of ancient India, we shall have to
dwell a little longer upon the records of his life, and in the first place we
must examine such chronological data as exist for the determination of his
period.
1 Cp. S. B. E. , vol. XLV, p. 121, and Dr. Hoernle in Hastings' Encyclopaedia,
vol. I, p. 261.
2 Cp, S. B. E. vol. XLV, pp. 119 sq.
## p. 139 (#173) ############################################
VI]
TRADITIONAL DATE OF MAHAVIRA
139
2
The Jains themselves have preserved chronological records concerning
Mabāvīra and the succeeding pontiffs of the Jain church which may have
been begun at a comparatively early date. But it seems quite clear that,
at the time when these lists were put into their present form, the real date
of Mahāvīra had already either been forgotten or was at least doubtful.
The traditional date of Mahāvīra's death on which the Jains base their
chronological calculations corresponds to the year 470 before the founda-
tion of the Vikrama era in 58 B. C. ; i. e. , 528 B. c. 1 This reckoning is based
mainly on a list of kings and dynasties, who are supposed to have reigned
between 528 and 58 B. C. ; but the list is absolutely valueless, as it confuses
rulers of Ujjain, Magadha, and other kingdoms; and some of these may
perhaps have been contemporary, and not successive as they are represent-
ed. Moreover, if we adopt the year 528 B. C. it would exclude every
possibility of Mahāvīra having preached his doctrine at the same time as
Buddha, as the Buddhist texts assert ; for there is now a general agreement
among scholars that Buddha died within a few years of 480 B. C. ? ; and
therefore some fifty years would have elapsed between the decease of the
two prophets. But we are told that Buddha was 80 years old at his death,
and that he did not begin preaching before his 36th year, that is to say, at a
time when Mahāvīra, according to the traditional date, was already dead.
Finally, both Mahāvīra and Buddha were contemporaries with a king of
Magadha, whom the Jains call Kūņika, and the Buddhists Ajātçatru ; and
he began his reign only eight years before Buddha's death. Therefore, if
Mahāvisa died in 528 B. C. , he could not have lived in the reign of Kūņika.
So we must, no doubt, wholly reject this date and instead of it adopt
another which was long ago suggested by Professor Jacobi' on the authority
of the Jain author Hemachandra (d. 1172 A. D. ), viz. 468 (467) B. C.
The dynastic list of the Jains mentioned above tells that Chandragupta,
the Sandrokottos of the Greeks, began his reign 255 years before the
Vikrama era, or in 313 B. C. , a date that cannot be far wrong. And
Hemachandra states that at this time 155 years had elapsed since the death
of Mahāvīra, which would thus have occurred in 468 B. c. This date agrees
very well with other calculations and is only contradicted by a passage in
the Buddhist Digha Nikaya' which tells us that Nigaộtha Nātaputta-the
>
-
a
1 Or 527 B. C. according to those authorities who regard 57 B. C. as the starting
point of the Vikrama era. Dates are here given on the assumption that Vikrama era
began in 58 B. C.
2 In 483 B. C. according to the system of chronology adopted in this work ; or
in 478 (477) B. C. as appears more probable to the present writer. For a full discussion
the dates of Mahāvīra and Buddha, on the assumption that the Vikrama era began in
57 B. C. , eee Charrentier, Ind. Ant. , 1914, pp. 118 ff, 125 ff; 167 ff.
3 Kalpasutra, pp. 8 ff.
4 V, Inf. , p. 146-47.
5 D. N. , III, pp. 117, 209. Also Majjhima Nikāya, II, pp. 273 ff. Cp. Chalmers,
J. R. A. S. , 1895, pp, 665 f.
2
## p. 140 (#174) ############################################
140
[CH.
THE HISTORY OF THE JAINS
name by which the Buddhists denote Mahāvira-died before Buddha. This
assertion, is however, in contradiction with other contemporaneous state-
ments, and forms no real obstacle to the assumption of the date 468 B. C.
We may therefore adopt this year as our basis for calculating the various
dates in Mahāvira's life.
To give a sketch of Mahāvīra's life is a somewhat difficult task as
the oldest existing biography, included in the chapter of the Kalpasūtra to
which we have referred, is fanciful and exaggerated, bearing in these
respects a certain resemblance to the tales in the Lalita-vistara and Nidāna-
kathā concerning the early life of Buddha. If this biography is really the
work of Bhadrabāhu, it may be expected to contain notices of great value,
even although its statements cannot always be accepted as strictly accurate.
There are, moreover, in several old canonical works passages which give
information on various events in Mahāvīra's life; and the Buddhist
scriptures also give us some valuable hints.
The capital of Videha, Vesāli or Vaicāli', was without doubt one of
the most flourishing towns of India about 500 years before the beginning
of our era. The government, which was republican, or perhaps rather
oligarchical, was entrusted to the princely family of the Licchavis, who are
often mentioned in Buddhist and Jain writings, and who were certainly
mightier at that time than at a later date, when an author remarks that they
lived by assuming the title of king (rājan). ' Just outside Vaicāli lay the
suburb Kundagrāma-probably surviving in the modern village of Basu-
kund-and here lived a wealthy nobleman, Siddhārtha, head of a certain
warrior-clan called the Jñātrikas. This Siddhārtha was married to the
princess Triçalā, sister of Chețaka, the most eminent amongst the Licebavi
princes, and ruler of Vaicāli. To them were born, according to the
tradition, one daughter and two sons, the younger of whom was called
Vardhamāna, the future Mahā vīra. Through the Licchavis Siddhārtha
became the relative of a very powerful monarch ; for king Bimbisāra or
Creņika of Magadha, the patron of Buddha and the mightiest ruler of
Eastern India, had married Chellanā, daughter of Chetaka , and she was
mother of Ajātaçatru or Kuņika, who murdered his father eight years
before the death of Buddha, and ascended the blood-stained throne of
Magadha.
This is what we learn from the Kalpasūtra concerning Mahāvīra's
pedigree ; and there is no reason to doubt this information. But the birth
of great men- and especially religious teachers- has often afterwards been
made a theme for the most fanciful and supernatural legends. And so the
Kalpasūtra tells us that Mahāvīra, when he descended from the heavenly
1 The site and surroundings of Vaicāli are indicated by Vincent A. Smith,
J. R. A. S. 1902, pp. 267 ff.
2 The Arthaçāstra of Kautilya, p. 376.
I
>
1
1
## p. 141 (#175) ############################################
VI ).
MAHĀVĪRA
141
)
palace of Pushpottara where he had led his previous existence, was at first
conceived in the womb of Devānandā, wife of the Brāhman Rishabhadatta.
This couple, too, lived in the suburb of Kundagrāma. However, it had
never happened in the innumerable cycles of previous world-periods that a
prophet had been born in a Brāhman family ; and consequently the god
Çakra (Indra) had the embryo removed from the womb of Devānandā to
that of Triçalā. We must observe, however, that this tale is only believed
by the Çvetāmbaras, and constitutes one of the four main points rejected
by the Digambaras, who seem here to hold the more sensible opinion.
Just like the mother of Buddha, the princess Triçalā had auspicious
dreams in the very night of conception ; and the interpreters foretold that
the child would become either a universal monarch or a prophet possessing
all-comprising knowledge. So the boy, whose birth was celebrated alike
by gods and men, was received by his parents with the most lofty expecta-
tions, and was educated to the highest perfection in all branches of
knowledge and art. In due time he was married to a lady, named Yaçodā,
and had by her a daughter, who became the wife of Jamāli, a future disciple
of his father-in-law, and the propagator of the first schism in the Jain
church. However, Mahāvīra's mind was not turned towards secular
things ; and in his thirtieth year, after the decease of his parents, he left
his home with the permission of his elder brother, Nandivardhana, and set
out for the life of a homeless monk.
The first book of the Jain canon, the Āchārānga-sūtra, has preserved
a sort of religious ballad1 giving an account of the years during which
Mahāvīra led a life of the hardest asceticism, thus preparing himself for the
attainment of the highest spiritual knowledge, that of a prophet. During
the first thirteen months he never changed his robe, but let 'all sorts of
living beings' – as the text euphemistically says-crawl about on his body,
but after this time he laid aside every kind of garment and went about as
a naked ascetic. By uninterrupted meditation, unbroken chastity, and the
most scrupulous observations of the rules concerning eating and drinking,
he fully subdued his senses ; nor did he ever in the slightest degree hurt or
cause offence to any living being. Roaming about in countries inhabited
by savage tribes, rarely having a shelter in which to rest for the night, he
had to endure the most painful and injurious treatment from the barbarous
inhabitants. However, he never lost his patience, and never indulged in
feelings of hatred or revenge against his persecutors. His wanderings seem
to have covered a wide area and on occasions ho visited Rajagriha, the
capital of Magadha, and other towns where the utmost honour was shown
him by pious householders.
It was during one of these visits to Nālandā, a suburb of Bājagriha
famous in the sacred history of the Buddhists, that he met with Gosāla
Translated in S. B E. , vol. XXII, pp. 79 ff.
>
1
## p. 142 (#176) ############################################
142
. (CH.
THE HISTORY OF THE JAINS
Mamkhaliputta, a mendicant friar, who attached himself to Mahāvīra for
some years. The consequences of this meeting were certainly disastrous for
both the teacher and the disciple. For six years they lived together practis-
ing the most austere asceticism ; but after that time, on account of a dispute
which arose out of a mere trifle, Gosāla separated himself from Mahāvīra,
and set up a religious system of his own, soon afterwards proclaiming that
he had attained to the highest stage of saintship, that of a tirthakara. This
claim was put forth two years before Mahāvīra himself had reached his
perfect enlightenment. The doctrines and views of Gosāla are known to us
only from notices scattered throughout the Jain and Buddhist writings and
his followers, the Ājīvika sect, have left no written documents ; but from
the intolerant and bitter sayings of the Jains concerning Gosāla whom they
stigmatise as merely a treacherous imposter, we may well conclude that the
cause of dissension between him and his former teacher was deep-rooted,
and that this quarrel must have been a severe blow to the rising influence
of Mahăvira and the establishment of the new religious community.
Gozāla took up his head-quarters in a potter's shop belonging to a woman
named Hālāhalā at Çrāvastī, and seems to have gained considerable repu-
tation in that town. We shall hear something about him at a later stage;
but for the present we must return to Mahāvīra himself.
Twelve years spent in self-penance and meditation were not fruitless;
for in the thirteenth year Mahāvira at last reached supreme knowledge and
final deliverance from the bonds of pleasure and pain. The ipsissimi verba
of an old text will perhaps best show us how the Jains themselves have
described this the most important moment of the prophet's life: during the
thirteenth year, in the second month of summer, in the fourth fortnight, the
light (fortnight) of Vaicākha, on its tenth day, called Suvrata, while the
moon was in conjunction with the asterism Uttara-Phalguni, when the
shadow had turned towards the east, and the first wake was over, outside
of the town Jřimbhikagrāma, on the northern bank of the river Rijupālikā,
in the field of the householder Sāmāga, in a north-eastern direction from
an old temple, not far from a Sāl tree, in a squatting position with joined
heels exposing himself to the heat of the sun, with the knees high and the
head low, in deep meditation, in the midst of abstract meditation, he
reached nirvana, the complete and full, the unobstructed, unimpeded, in-
finite and supreme, best knowledge and intuition, called kevala (total).
When the venerable one had become an Arhat and Jina, he was a kevalin,
omniscient and comprehending all objects, he knew all conditions of the
world, of gods, men, and demons; whence they come, where they go,
whether they are born as men or animals, or become gods or hell-beings;
their food, drink, doings, desires, and the thoughts of their minds ; he saw
## p. 143 (#177) ############################################
VI
MAHĀVIRA
143
1
and knew all conditions in the whole world of all living beings. ?
At this time Vardhamāna, henceforth styled Mahāvira (the great hero)
or Jina (the conqueror), was 42 years old ; and from this age he entered
upon a new stage of life, that of a religious teacher and the head of a sect
called the nirgranthas 'free from fetters,' a designation nowadays obsolete,
and superseded by the term Jainas 'followers of the Jina. '
His parents
had, according to a tradition which seems trustworthy, been followers of
Pārçva, the previous tirhankara : as has already been pointed out, the
doctrine of Mahāvīra was scarcely anything else than a modified or reno-
vated form of Pārçva's creed. As he was a nirgrantha monk, and a scion
of the Jnātại clan, his opponents, the Buddhists, call him Nigganha
Nāt (h)aputta (in Sanskrit Nigrantho Jñātriputra? ). We owe to Professor
Jacobi the suggestion, which is undoubtedly correct, that the teacher, who
is thus styled in the sacred books of the Buddhists, is identical with
Mahāvīra, and that consequently he was a contemporary of Buddha.
We possess little knowledge of the thirty years, during which Mahāvira
wandered about preaching his doctrine and making converts. He appa-
rently visited all the great towns of N. and S. Bihar, principally dwelling
in the kingdoms of Magadha and Anga. The Kalpasūtra tells us that he
spent his rainy seasons, during which the rules for monks prohibited the
wandering life, at various places, e. g. at Champā the capital of Anga, at
Mithilā in the kingdom of Videha, and at Çrāvastī, but chiefly, at his native
town Vaicāli and at Rājagriha, the old capital of Magadha. He frequently
met with Bimbisāra and his son, Ajātaçatru or Kūņika, the kings of
Magadha, and their near relations; and according to the texts he was
always treated by them and other important persons with the utmost res-
pect, and made many converts amongst the members of the highest society.
But we must observe that the Buddhists in an equal degree claim these kings
as followers of their prophet; and we may conclude that uniform courtesy
towards teachers of different sects was as common a characteristic of Indian
kings in those days as at a later period. The Jains do not tell us anything
about the Buddhists; but the latter frequently mention discussions and
controversies between Buddha and disciples of Mahāvīra. In these accounts
Buddha, of course, always has the last word, and is said to have inflicted
considerable loss on the Jain community through the converts which he
made amongst its followers. Even king Ajātaçatru, according to the Pāli
texts, failed to obtain a satisfactory explanation concerning matters of
religion from Mahāvira, and consequently turned to Buddha with a far
better result ; but there seems to be little doubt that the Jains have more
claim to include the patricide king amongst their converts than the Buddhi-
sts. Another prominent lay. follower of Mahāvīra was the householder of
1 From the Āchärānga-sütra, vol. I, pp. 15, 25-26 (translated in S. B. E. , vol. XXII
pp. 201 sq).
## p. 144 (#178) ############################################
144
[ ch.
THE HISTORY OF THE JAINS
.
I
!
Rajagriha; Upāli, who in his enthusiasm embarked on the attempt to con-
vince Buddha of his wrong views. We learn, however, that the great
,
teacher easily upset his arguments, and gained in his opponent a stalwart
adherent to his creed. Subsequently, Upāli is said to have treated his
former teacher with an arrogance, which so shocked Mahāvira that 'hot
blood gushed from his mouth. "
But although the relations between the Jains and Buddhists were by
no means friendly, we must probably not attach too much importance to
the controversies between them or to the number of converts said to have
been gained by one sect at the expense of the other.
Between two con-
temporary religious communities working side by side in the same region
and often coming into contact there must have occurred skirmishes; but the
whole doctrine and mode of life adopted by the Buddhists was too widely
different from that of the Jains to give occasion for more than somewhat
temporary relations. We cannot here enter upon any full investigation of
the doctrine of Mahāvira. It must suffice here to point out that it repre-
sents, probably, in its fundamental tenets one of the oldest modes of thought
known to us, the idea that all nature, even that which seems to be most
inanimate, possesses life and the capability of reanimation ; and this
doctrine the Jains have, with inflexible conservatism, kept until modern
times. This has nothing in common with the philosophy of Buddha. There
is, in reality, no resemblance between the two systems except in regard to
such matters as are the commonplaces of all Hindu philosophy. Even for
those superficial believers who looked more to the exterior appearance and
mode of life than to the doctrine and faith, the two sects presented an
aspect so completely different that one could not easily be confused with
the other. Buddha had at first sought freedom from karman, or the bond-
age of 'works', and from transmigration in exaggerated self-torture : but
he soon found that this was not the way to peace ; and consequently he
did not enforce upon his followers the practice of too hard self-penance but
advised them to follow a middle way, that is to say, a simple life but one
free from self-torture. Mahāvīra also had practised asceticism but with a
different result ; for he had found in its severest forms the road to deliver-
ance, and did not hesitate to commend nakedness, self-torture, and death by
starvation as the surest means of reaching final annihilation; and the Jains
proud of their own austerities often stigmatise the Buddhists as given to
greed and luxury. 'Buddha always warned his disciples against hunting or
causing pain to any living being ; but Mahavira fell into exaggerations even
here, and he seems in reality often to care much more for the security of
animals and plants than for that of human beings. Such instances of a
deep-rooted divergence in views could easily be multiplied ; but what has
been already pointed out is sufficient to prove that the Jains and Buddhists
1 Cf, tle Upali • sutra Majjhima Nikaya, vol. I, pp. 371 ff.
1
.
## p. 145 (#179) ############################################
VI]
SCHISMS IN THE JAIN CHURCH
145
were in fact too far asunder to be a ble to inflict any very serious damage
on each other. But this does not mean, however, that rivalry and hatred
did not exist between them : such feelings certainly did exist, and we need
not doubt that these rivals did their best to annoy each other according
to abilities and opportunities.
A far more dangerous rival of Mahāvīra was Gosāla. Not only was
his doctrine, although differing on many points, mainly taken from the
tenets of Mahāviral ; but his whole mode of life also, in its insistence on
nakedness and on the utter deprivation of all comforts, bore a close resemb-
lance to that of the Jains. Between two sects so nearly related the
transition must have been easy ; and pious people may not always have
been quite sure whether they were honouring the adherents of one sect or
of the other. The Jain scriptures admit that Gosāla had a great many
followers in Çrāvasti ; and, if we may trust their hints as to his laxity in
moral matters, it is possible that his doctrine may for some people have
possessed other attractions than those of asceticism and holiness. Although
Mahāvīra is said not to have had any personal meeting with Gosāla until
shortly before the death of the latter, it seems clear that they carried on a
bitter war against each other through their followers. Finally, in the
sixteenth year of his career as a prophet, Mahāvira visited Çravasti, the
headquarters of his mortal enemy. The account given by the Jains tells us
that, at this meeting, Mahāvira inflicted a final blow on his adversary, and
that Gosāla died a week afterwards, having passed his last days in a state of
drunkenness and mental imbecility, but showing some signs of repentance
at the last. But the story is rather confused, and it seems doubtful to what
extent we may trust it. However, it may be regarded as beyond dispute
that Mahāvira was considerably relieved by the death of his opponent; and,
according to the Bhagavati-sūtra, he took a rather strange revenge on the
dead man by describing to his disciples all the wicked deeds he would have
to perform, and all the pains he would have to suffer in future existences,
thus to a certain degree anticipating Dante's treatment of his adversaries.
The death of Gosāla occurred shortly after Ajātaçatru had gained accession
to the throne of Magadha by the murder of his father.
Even within the Jain church there occurred certain schismatical
difficulties at this time. In the fourteenth year of Mahāvira's office as
prophet, his nephew and son-in-law, Jamāli, headed an opposition against
him and similarly, two years afterwards, a holy man in the community,
named Tisagutta, made an attack on a certain point in Mahāvira's doctrine.
But both of these schisms merely concerned trifles, and seem to have
caused no great trouble, as they were speedily stopped by the authority of
the prophet himself. Jamāli, however, persisted in his heretical opinions
ūntil his death.
1 Cp. Hastings' Encyclopaedia, vol. I, p. 261, for further details.
a
## p. 146 (#180) ############################################
146
( ch.
THE HISTORY OF THE JAINS
Mahāvira survived his hated rival Gosila for sixteen years, and
probably witnessed the rapid progress of his faith during the reign of
Ajātaçatru, who seems to have been a supporter of the Jains, if we may
infer that gratitude is the motive which leads them to make excuses for
the horrible murder of his father, Bimbisāra. However, we are not in-
formed of any special events happening during the last period of his life,
which may have been as monotonous as that of most religious mendicants.
He died, after having reached an age of 72 years, in the house of king
Hastipāla's scribe in the little town of Pāwā near Rājagriha, a place still
visited by thousands of Jain pilgrims. This event may have occurred at
the end of the rainy season in the year 468 B. c. Thus, he had survived both
of his principal adversaries ; for Buddha's decease most probably took
place at least ten, if not fifteen, years earlier,
Out of the eleven gañadharas 'heads of the school,' or apostles, of
Mahāvira only one survived him, viz. Sudharman, who became the first
pontiff of the new church after his master. Absolutely nothing is known
concerning the fate of the community for more than 150 years after the
death of its founder beyond the very scanty conclusions which may be drawn
from the legendary tales related by later Jain writers, above all the great
Hemachandra. According to these authorities, Ajātaçatru was succeeded by
his son Udāyin, a prince, who may have reigned for a considerable time, and
who was a firm upholder of the Jain religion. But the irony of fate was
visible even here ; for the very favour which he had bestowed upon the Jains
proved to be the cause of his ruin :-a prince whose father he had dethroned
plotted against his life ; and, aware of the welcome accorded to the Jains by
Udāyin, he entered his palace in the disguise of a Jain monk, and murdered
him in the night. This happened 60 years after Mahāvira's decease. The
dynasty of the nine Nandas, somewhat ill-famed in other records which call
its founder the son of a courtezan and a barber? , then came to the throne of
Magadha. However, the Jains do not share the bad opinion of these kings
which was held by the Buddhists. This fact seems to suggest that the Nanda
kings were not unfavourably inclined towards the Jain religion ; and this
inference gains some support from another source, for the badly mutilated
inscription of Khāravela, king of Kalinga and a faithful Jain, mentions,
apparently, in one passage 'king Nanda' in unmistakable connexion with
‘an idol of the first Jina? . ' But the reign of the Nandas is one of the darkest
event of the many hopelessly dark epochs in the history of ancient India.
The last of the Nandas was dethroned by Chandragupta, the founder
of the Maurya dynasty, with the aid of the great statesman, Chāṇakya,
1 For reasons why the Buddhist account, according to which Mahāvira died
before Buddha, is not accepted here, see Charpentier, Ind. Ant. , 1914, p. 177.
2 See however Chapter XIII.
3 Cf. Ind Ant. , Ind. , 1914, p. 173.
## p. 147 (#181) ############################################
3
VI ]
ÇVETĀ MBARAS AND DIGAMBARAS
147
within a few years of the departure of Alexander the Great from India. The
Jains put the date of Chandragupta's accession in 313 (312) B. C. , that is to
say, eight years later than the Buddhists. This date coincides probably with
a year which marks an epoch in the history of the Jain church. Sudharman,
the first pontiff, had died twenty years after his master leaving the mitre to
Jambu, who held his high office for 44 years, dying at a time nearly
coincident with the accession of the Nandas. After him passed three
generations of pontiffs ; and, in the time of the last Nanda, the Jain church
was governed by two high-priests, Sambhūtavijaya and Bhadrabāhu, the
author of the biography of Mahāvīra quoted above. These two were the
last who knew perfectly the fourteen pūrvas or divisions of the most ancient
Jain scriptures ; and Sambhūtavijaya is said to have died in the same year
in which Chandragupta took possession of the throne. At the same time a
dreadful famine lasting for twelve years devastated the region of Bengal ;
and Bhadrabāhu, seeing that this evil time would provoke numerous
offences against the ecclesiastical rules, thought it prudent to escape.
Gathering his followers together, therefore, he emigrated, and took up his
abode in the country of Karņāța in Southern India. The whole
community, however, did not follow him. Many Jains remained in
Magadha and other places under the spiritual leadership of Sthūlabhadra,
a disciple of Sambhūtavijaya.
At the end of the famine the emigrants returned, but at this time
Bhadrabāhu seems to bave laid down his leadership of the church, and to
have retired to Nepal in order to pass the remainder of his life in penance
leaving the succession to Sthūlabhadra. There is no reason to believe the
account given by the Digambaras, according to which he was murdered by
his own disciples. But, in any case, this time seems to have been one of
misfortune for the Jain church; and there can be no doubt is was then, i. e.
;
about 300 B. C. , that the great schism originated, which has ever since
divided the community in two great sects, the Cvetāmbaras and the
Digambaras. The returning monks, who had during the famine strictly
observed the rules in all their severity, were discontented with the conduct
of the brethren who had remained in Magadha, and stigmatised them as
heretics of wrong faith and lax discipline. Moreover, during this time of
dissolution, the old canon had fallen into oblivion ; and consequently the
monks who had remained in Magadha convoked a great council at
Pāțaliputra, the modern Patna, in order to collect and revise the scriptures.
However, this proved to be an undertaking of extraordinary difficulty,
since the pūrvas or older parts were known perfectly only to Bhadrabāhu,
who had at this time already settled in Nepāl; and Sthūlabhadra, who went
there in person, although he learnt from his predecessor all the fourteen
púrras, was forbidden to teach more than the first ten of them to others.
## p. 148 (#182) ############################################
148
[ch.
THE HISTORY OF THE JAINS
The canon established by the Council was therefore a fragmentary one;
and in it, to some extent, new scriptures, took the place of the old. In some
degree it may be represented by the present canon of the Cvetāmbaras,
since that too is preserved in a somewhat disorderly condition. The
returning monks, the spiritual ancestors of the Digambaras, seem to have
taken no part in the council, and to have proclaimed that the real canon
had been hopelessly lost ; and even to the present day they have continued
to hold the same opinion. They regard the whole canon of the
Çvetāmbaras, the Siddhānta as it is called, as merely a late and unauthori-
tative collection of works, brought together by Jina chandra in Valabhi at
a far later date.
But probably the difficulties which beset the Jain church at this period
were not only internal. As is well known, the Jains nowadays are settled
principally in Western India, Gujarāt, etc. That they have been there for a
very long time is certain, since their non-canonical writings, as well as
epigraphical documents, bear witness at an early date to their influence in
these parts of India. As the historical records of the sect have very little
to tell us of the reign of Chandragupta and his son Bindusāra, and perhaps
even still less of the great Açoka, it seems probable that they had already
in the third century B. c. begun to lose their foothold in Eastern India. The
manual of politics by Chāņakya describes a purely Brāhman society ; and
it may perhaps not be too hazardous to infer from this fact that the first
rise of the Maurya dynasty may have marked an attempt to restore the
Brāhman power and so check the rising influence of the heterodox
communities. If so, this policy was certainly abandoned by Açoka whose
zeal for Buddhism may have been one of the main causes for the downfall
of his great empire immediately after his death. It is true that Açoka in
one of his edicts mentions his protection of the nirgranthas as well as of
the Buddhists and other pious men ; but any attempt to prove a greater
interest on his part in the welfare of the Jains must fail, unsupported as it
is by the scriptures of the Jains themselves. It is true too that Khāravela,
king of Kalinga, who, although his exact date may be doubted, certainly,
lived a considerable time after Açoka, displayed a great zeal for the Jain
religion : but it seems quite clear that, at the time of Açoka's death, the
Jains had practically lost their connexion with Eastern India ; since they
apparently know nothing of his grandson Daçaratha, who succeeded him in
Magadha, and, of the following princes, only the usurper Pushyamitra, a
patron of Brāhmanism, is mentioned by them. On the other hand, they
tell us that Samprati, another grandson of Açoka who reigned probably in
Ujjain, was a strong supporter of their religion, and his capital seems to
have played at this time an important role in the history of Jainism.
As we have seen, in about 300 B. C the division of the Jain church
## p. 149 (#183) ############################################
VI]
WESTERN SETTLEMENTS
149
into the two great sects of the Çvetāmbaras and Digambaras had probably
already begun. The final separation between the two communities is, no
doubt, reported not to have taken place before 79 or 82 A. D. ; but the list
of teachers and schools in the Kalpasūtra and the numerous inscriptions
from Mathurā, which date mostly from the time of the later Kushāņa kings,
i. e. , after 78 A. D. , afford sufficient proof that the Çvetāmbara community
was not only established but had become subdivided into smaller sects at
an earlier period. This is especially clear from the frequent mention of
nuns in the Mathurā inscriptions for it is only the Cvetāmbaras who give
women admission into the order. Everything tends to show that the Jains
were probably already at this time (300 B. C. ) gradually losing their position
in the kingdom of Magadha, and that they had begun their migration
towards the Western part of India, where they settled, and where they have
retained their settlements to the present day. Attention has already been
called to the fact that the later Jain authors mention Ujjain as a place
where their religion had already gained a strong foothold in the age of
Açoka and his immediate successors. Another locality in which the Jains
seem to have been firmly established, from the middle of the second
century B. c. onwards, was Mathurā, in the old kingdom of the Çūrasenas,
known at an earlier date, e. g. by Megasthenes (300 B. c. ), as the centre of
Krishna-worship. The numerous inscriptions, excavated in this city by
General Cunningham and Dr. Führer, and deciphered by Professor Bühler,
tell us about a wide-spread and firmly established Jain community, strongly
supported by pious lay devotees, and very zealous in the consecration and
worship of images and shrines dedicated to Mahāvira and his predecessors.
An inscription, probably dated from 157 A. D. (=79 Çaka), mentions the
Vodva tope as 'built by the gods,' which, as Bühler rightly remarks, proves
that it in the second century A. D. must have been of considerable age as
everything concerning its origin had been already forgotten.
Except the long lists of teachers, often more or less apocryphal, which
have been preserved by the modern subdivisions of the Jain community,
there exist practically no historical records concerning the Jain church in
the centuries immediately preceding our era. Only one legend, the
Kāla kācharya-kathānaka, 'the story of the teacher Kālaka,' tells us about
some events which are supposed to have taken place in Ujjain and other
parts of Western India during the first part of the first century B. c. , or
immediately before the foundation of the Vikrama era in 58 B. c. This
legend is perhaps not totally devoid of all historical interest. For it records
how the Jain saint Kālaka, having been insulted by king Gardabhilla of
Ujjain, who, according to various traditions, was the father of the famous
Vikramāditya, went in his desire for revenge to the land of the Çakas,
whose king was styled 'King of Kings' (sāhānusāhi). This title, in its
.
## p. 150 (#184) ############################################
150
[CH
THE HISTORY OF THE JAINS
a
Greek and Indian forms, was certainly borne by the Çaka kings of the
Punjab, Maues and his successors, who belong to this period ; and, as it
actually appears in the form shaonano shao on the coins of their successors,
the Kushāņa monarchs, we are perhaps justified in concluding that the
legend is to some extent historical in character. However this may be, the
story goes on to tell us that Kālaka persuaded a number of Çaka satraps to
invade Ujjain and overthrow the dynasty of Gardabhilla ; but that, some
years afterwards, his son, the glorious Vikramāditya, repelled the invaders
and re-established the throne of his ancestors. What the historical
foundation of this legend may be, is wholly uncertain -perhaps it contains
faint recollections of the Scythian dominion in Western India during the
first century B. C. In any case, it seems undoubtedly to give further proof
of connexion of the Jains with Ujjain, a fact indicated also by their use
of the Vikrama era, which was established in the country of Mālwā, of
which Ujjain was the capital.
Thus, the history of the Jains during these centuries is enveloped in
almost total darkness; nor bave we any further information as to the
internal conditions of the community. Almost the only light thrown upon
these comes from the Mathurā inscriptions, which incidentally mention a
number of various branches, schools, and families of the Jain community.
From this source, too, we learn the names of teachers who under different
titles acted as spiritual leaders of these subdivisions, and of monks and
nuns who practised their austere life under their leadership. Much the
same religious conditions as are shown by the inscriptions have been pre-
served in the Jain church till the present day, although the names and
external forms of the sects and the monastic schools may have changed in
the course of twenty centuries. Moreover, the inscriptions mention the
names of a vast number of these pious lay people, both male and female,
who, in all ages, by providing the monks and nuns with their scanty liveli-
hood, have proved one of the firmest means of support for the Jain church
and whose zeal for their religion is attested by the numerous gifts of objects
for worship recorded in the inscriptions. Dr. Hoernle' is no doubt right in
maintaining that this good organisation of the Jain lay community must
have been a factor of the greatest importance to the church during the whole
of its existen ce, and may have been one of the main reasons why the Jain
religion continued to keep its position in India, whilst its far more im.
portant rival, Buddhism, was entirely swept away by the Brāhman reaction.
The inflexible conservatism of the small Jain community in holding fast to
its original in stitutions and doctrine has probably been the chief cause of
its survival during periods of severe affliction ; for, as Professor Jacobi has
pointed out long ago, there can be little doubt, that the most important
1 Proceed. of the A8. Soc. of Bengal, 1898, p. 53.
2 2. D. M. G. , XXXVIII, pp. 17 sq.
>
## p. 151 (#185) ############################################
VI ]
CONSERVATISM OF THE JAINS
151
doctrines of the Jain religion have remained practically unaltered since the
first great separation in the time of Bhadrabāhu about 300 B. C. And,
although a number of the less vital rules concerning the life and practices
of monks and laymen, which we find recorded in the holy scriptures, may
have fallen into oblivion or disuse, there is no reason to doubt that the
religious life of the Jain community is now substantially the same as it was
two thousand years ago.
It must be confessed from this that an absolute
refusal to admit changes has been the strongest safeguard of the Jains. To
what extent the well-known quotation ‘sint ut sunt aut non sint may be
applicable to the Jains of our days, may be questioned ; but the singularly
primitive idea that even lifeless matter is animated by a soul, and the
austerest perhaps of all known codes of disciplinary rules seem scarcely
congruent with modern innovations.
In the preceding pages an attempt has been made to give a brief
sketch of the history of the Jain church from its foundation or reformation
by Mahāvira about 500 B. c. down to the beginning of our era.
While we
possess materials which enable us to construct a fairly clear biography of
the prophet, and while we have at least some information concerning the
events which preceded and were contemporary with the beginning of the
great separation between Cvetāmbaras and Digambaras about 300 B. C. , the
following period is almost totally devoid of any historical record. And this
is not the only blank in Jain ecclesiastical history. Scarcely more is known
concerning the fate of the Jain church during the early centuries of our era
down to the time of the great council of Valabhi, in the fifth or at the
beginning of the sixth century A. D. , when the canon was written down in
its present form. The Jain church has never had a very great number of
adherents ; it has never attempted-at least not on any grand scale - to
preach its doctrines through missionaries outside India. Never rising to
an overpowering height but at the same time never sharing the fate of its
rival, Buddhism, that of complete extinction in its native land, it has led
a quiet existence through the centuries and has kept its place amongst the
religious system of India till the present day, thanks to its excellent
organisation and to its scrupulous care for the preservation of ancient
customs, institutions, and doctrine.
## p. 152 (#186) ############################################
CHAPTER VII
THE EARLY HISTORY OF THE BUDDHISTS
1. PRE-BUDDHISTIC
The early history of the Buddhists should properly begin far enough
back before the birth of the Buddha to throw light on the causes that were
at work in producing the rise and progress of the Buddhist reformer.
Unfortunately, even after all that has been written on the subject of early
Buddhist chronology, we are still uncertain as to the exact date of the
Buddha's birth. The date 483 B. C. which is adopted in this History must
still be regarded as provisional. The causes of this uncertainty which were
explained by the present writer in 1877 still remain the same :
If the date for Asoka is placed too early in the Ceylon chronicles, can
we still
trust the 218 years which they allege to have elapsed from the coinmencement of the
Buddhist era down to the time of Asoka ? If so we have only to add that number to
the correct date of Asoka, and thus fix the Buddhist era (the date of the Buddha's
death) at 483 B. C. or shortly after. Of the answer to this question, there can, I think,
be no doubt. We can not? .
This statement was followed by an analysis of the details of the lists
of kings and teachers, the length of whose reigns or lives, added together,
amount to this period of 218 years. The analysis shows how little the list
can be relied on. The fact is that all such calculations are of very
doubtful
validity when they have to be made backwards for any lengthened period.
Sinologists, Assyriologists, Egyptologists have not been able to agree on
results sought by this method ; and, though Archbishop Usher's attempt
to discover in this way, from the Hebrew records, the correct date of the
creation was long accepted, it is now mere matter for derision, As is well
known, even the Christian chronologists, though the interval they had to
cover was very short, were wrong in their calculation of our Christian era.
